30 November 2010, London
The culture of Philanthropy and attitudes to giving

First ever snapshot of global giving, using both money and time as indicators

Almost a quarter (23%) of high net worth individuals globally say charity is a "top spending priority"

US, Ireland, South Africa and India lead the way as countries that donate significant amounts of money and time to charitable causes

A new report from Barclays Wealth, a leading global wealth manager, which surveyed 2,000 high net worth individuals around the world, has provided a snapshot of global philanthropy revealing key differences in the attitudes and behaviours that are driving high net worth individuals to support charitable causes.
'Global Giving: The Culture of Philanthropy' measures the resources being invested into charity and causes by wealthy people across the world, using both money and time as gauges for the first time. Furthermore, the report also looks at some of the drivers behind these giving behaviours, identifying unique cultural factors that shape a country's philanthropic style and motivate individuals to give to charity.

The 'Benefactors' and the 'Volunteers'

The report underlines that the concept of philanthropy is universal, with 44% of respondents more likely to make charity a spending priority when they retire, and the amount of time allocated to charity set to increase by 194%. Moreover, the survey identifies two distinct groups of givers using these two indicators; the 'Benefactors' who are the most generous with their financial spending, and the 'Volunteers' who are more inclined to devote their time to charity. Top five 'Benefactor' donors(% of respondents who say philanthropy is one of their top three spending priorities)
USA 41%
South Africa 37%
Saudi Arabia 32%
Ireland 30%
Taiwan 28% Top five 'Volunteer' donors(% of respondents who currently spend five hours a week or more on charity)
Ireland 20%
India 20%
USA 17%
South Africa 13%
Qatar 11%

Money and Time

By plotting these results together, the report further reveals countries where high net worth individuals are involved in philanthropic activity by donating both money and time to causes. The emergence of these donors further supports the findings of Barclays Wealth's 'Tomorrow's Philanthropist' report, which introduced a new breed of wealthy philanthropist; the 'Go-Giver'. Socially aware and motivated to give back to the communities they come from; 'Go-Givers' seek to support charities not only with financial aid but also using their time and expertise to benefit causes. Emma Turner, Director of Client Philanthropy at Barclays Wealth commented: "This report provides a strong sense of how the global community is really engaging with philanthropy - above and beyond simply donating money. This is the first time we've seen both money and time used as indicators of an individual's giving behaviours in research, and it is especially interesting to see the diversity of this involvement in charities across global regions."

Cultural Philanthropy

The four countries that ranked consistently in the top five of both indicators are Ireland, India, South Africa and the US. The report investigates the cultural nuances that drive these countries to engage in philanthropy in this way. The report identifies factors including:

A strong sense of community in Ireland - Personal connections to communities and causes are driving contributions to charity

The desire to combat omnipresent poverty in India - High net worth individuals have a strong sense that they must do as much as they can personally to combat society's problems

Bridging divides in society in South Africa - A national philosophy known as 'Ubuntu' drives altruism and a desire to support charitable causes

A sense of personal responsibility to help others in the US - An optimism about the creativity and innovation of individuals to solve problems and make changes in society

Emma Turner continued: "It is clear from all the research that we have done in this area that engagement in philanthropy is universal, but this new report provides unique insight into the ways in which this commitment manifests itself across the globe, and the cultural nuances that drive this behaviour in these populations. By learning more about the ways in which people give, we can further develop our understanding of the global philanthropic landscape and the unique motivations that are driving the wealthy community to engage in charitable giving."

__________________
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
-Robert A. Heinlein

Being as how I have spent quite a bit of time in the non-profit sector, I am inclined to believe that most people would like to give as part of their nature. It seems to be something that is spread across financial lines.

It is just that the wealthier individuals have the means to give larger sums, but I see quite a few people volunteer time in lieu of money.

Being as how I have spent quite a bit of time in the non-profit sector, I am inclined to believe that most people would like to give as part of their nature. It seems to be something that is spread across financial lines.

It is just that the wealthier individuals have the means to give larger sums, but I see quite a few people volunteer time in lieu of money.

But the point is, we're demonized as Americans, as being greedy & selfish. This argues against that.

__________________
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
-Robert A. Heinlein

It's always popular to pounce on the biggest dog. And I always feel the same pity for those that do.

It's not just countries, this is a trait of human nature that can be seen in movies, television, books, plays, music, cars...everything.

What cartoon maker has received more criticism than any other? What band? Which playwright has been lampooned more than any other? Which computer company is the evil empire and what are their sales like?

Some people don't like Disney because that style just isn't their taste. That's cool. Not everyone likes the same thing. But most (yes most) of the people who attack the company or the man do so simply because it's the big dog on the hill and it's 'cool' or 'rebellious' to hate the big dog. These people are fairly pathetic for doing so.

But the point is, we're demonized as Americans, as being greedy & selfish. This argues against that.

I don't think it does.

Realistically... why wouldn't people be greedy and selfish? Isn't that what helps fuel capitalism?

That doesn't mean that people aren't also compassionate. Yes, the desire to acquire material things might motivate most Americans, making them greedy, selfish, and materialistic. That doesn't mean they can't also be sensitive to the plights of others.

I just don't buy that the two are mutually exclusive. I think that if you can only be one or the other... then people would be giving away everything they have... which they don't do... or they would give away nothing. I think people want to improve their own financial standings and accumulate nice things, but as they do so, also want to share. Maybe it is because humans are social creatures. I don't know.

Realistically... why wouldn't people be greedy and selfish? Isn't that what helps fuel capitalism?

That doesn't mean that people aren't also compassionate. Yes, the desire to acquire material things might motivate most Americans, making them greedy, selfish, and materialistic. That doesn't mean they can't also be sensitive to the plights of others.

I just don't buy that the two are mutually exclusive. I think that if you can only be one or the other... then people would be giving away everything they have... which they don't do... or they would give away nothing. I think people want to improve their own financial standings and accumulate nice things, but as they do so, also want to share. Maybe it is because humans are social creatures. I don't know.

__________________
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
-Robert A. Heinlein